I wouldn't be so quick to doubt this poll. The registered as opposed to likely is due to how distant the election is, the Specter-Toomey race by Quinnipac does use likely voters.

8% is high for Nader, but there are alot of anti-war type people in the Pittsburgh and Philly area that might not be happy with Kerry wanting to keep our troops in Iraq, that has caused many anti-war types to go for Nader.

Next, if you check out www.dcpoliticalreport.com, you will find that these numbers have been pretty remarkably consistent, Bush has been about even with named Democrats for about a year now. It would seem strange for New Jersey of all places to go for Bush, though, but these numbers are interesting.

One thing that is interesting: The exit polls indicate that Edwards did best among areas and demographic groups that traditionally vote Republicans. Conversely, Kerry may have been saved in Wisconsin by the minority. Vote. The next primaries are in Utah, Idaho, and Hawaii. I can't predict what Hawaii will do as it's demographics are truly unique, but in Utah and Idaho the demographics strongly skew Republican. If Edwards can keep us his strength among GOP-leaning demographics, he could pick up two additional victories.

Keep in mind, while Bush's approval ratinf of 58% according to the latest polls at www.nationaljournal.com aren't stellar, Bush is polling better then any other candidate did the January of their election year since Eisenhower in 1956, and you can go check the election results on this site to see how that one went..

This has to be a big hurt to the Dean campaign. Gephardt did better among blue collar workers, pro-war Democrats, and Moderate to Conservative Democrats. Those Democrats are not as likely to side with Dean(In fact, Kerry and Edwards did well among them in Iowa also), and so I think most Gephardt supporters will side with Dean's rivals. I think this is the beginning of Democrats opposed to Dean's nomination coalescing and joining around candidates other then Dean.

I am suprised so many are predicting doom for Dean so quickly. Other candidates have lost the Iowa caucus before and gone on to victory, and I don't think that a huge amount of New Hampshirites are going to suddenly change their mind based on Iowa's vote. New Hampshire is where Dean had a larger lead initally and was a state that was always seen as more "Dean territory". Moreover, the resurgence of Kerry and Edwards may draw votes from Clark and split the Anti-Dean opposition. I think calling Dean dead would be premature.

Yes, another candidate could still win. While Dean is leading, he still is not polling a majority of the vote in any state. The early primaries should provide eventually for someone to arise as a clear challenger to Dean for the nomination. Once that happens, there will be alot of rallying to that candidate as there are many people in the Democratic Party who don't like him(calling the DLC which Clinton once headed the Republican wing of the Democratic Party didn't help) and many who are concerned about Dean's electability. In fact, I would predict at the end of the day Dean won't win the nomination.

No, polls done now cannot be used to accurately predict what will happen in November. However, they are an accurate reflection of how the public feels now, and the amount that Democrats are down is territory they will have to make up. And with the economy seen as likely to improve, that will be hard to do.

No Gore's out of touch stands on the environment and guns cost him WV at least and AR is socially conservative.

Clinton was(and still is) very popular in both Arkansas and West Virginia.Gore distancing himself from Clinton was not the only thing that cost Gore WV; Coal, Guns, distancing himself from Byrd, Steel and Gore's stuffy image hurt him badly. But distancing himself from Clinton was the final straw.

Whether or not an area is socially conservative has nothing whatsoever to do with with whether it leans Dem or not.

Actually, it is has everything to do with which party it leans toward.

None of them will drop out before New Hampshire. Kerry will be waiting for the NH results. Gephardt still has Missouri coming up Feb.3 which he can win. Lieberman and Clark are both hoping to try to pick up a couple of the Feb. 3 states. Edwards will be hoping to win South Carolina on Feb. 3. Kucinich, Sharpton, and Braun never had a chance in the first place.

I'd think because of Social Issues and the fate of the war, Bush still has a chance in WV.

I think New Mexico is likely to go over to Bush because the Democratic candidates seem to be trending towards protectionism. New Mexico being on our Southern border benefits greatly by NAFTA and free trade with Mexico, and so is likely to turn over to Bush.

Well, I am guessing Gephart will win the primary. I also believe the economy will continue to improve and that the Iraqi Elections in June 2004 will provide some clear and tangible hope of victory. I think we will see New Mexico and Oregon switch over to Bush, and Missouri and West Virginia switch over to Gephart, give Bush a narrow EV win.

I think Nader will do better when Dean tries to move to the middle after the primaries.

You're underestimating Bush's unpopularity in some quarters; the kind of people who would usually vote for a Green Party candidate (we're talking ultra-liberals, environmentalists, etc) absolutely despise him, and would vote for whoever they think is most likely to defeat Bush. I doubt they'll really care where the Dem. candidate stands, even assuming Dean suddenly moves to the middle. They just want Bush out of the White House.

I don't think the anti-Bush vote will win Dean the election, but I do believe it will nullify the threat posed by Nader.

I disagree. The Left-Wing movement wants the USA to withdraw from Iraq, and none of the mainstream Dems support that. That rift is going to prevent to many Far-Left votes from going to the Dems.

It likely won't make much of a difference who the VP is, and people generally do not vote for Vice Presidents. Predictions that a particular VP candidate would allow one candidate to peel off large regions of the country are not going to come true.

Clark could help the nominee look more patriotic as a VP, or an upper-midwesterner might signal to those voters some degree of sympathy for them. But don't expect any dramatic gains by picking a certain VP candidate.

- Dean wants to repeal all of Bush's tax cuts, including those on the middle class. This, as Kerry pointed out, amounts to a tax raise on the middle class. This position would not be popular among moderate voters. Also likely to be unpopular with moderates would be his calls for a new large-scale re-regulation of business.

- Dean is a very vocal opponent of the war and opposed it from the beginning. The problem is, a large majority of Americans still say they support the war. Even Democrats in polls say they want a candidate who at first supported the war but was critical about how it was handled- nominating such a candidate would likely be a stronger choice then Dean.

- On social issues, Dean would be put at a disadvantage by his social liberalism as well, due to his signing of the Civil Unions bill in Vermont. While the other candidates share this position, the fact that he actually signed the bill may make him more vulnerable. In addition, he opposes the Defense of Marriage Act which Bill Clinton signed that would prevent all 50 states from recognizing gay marriage should one state decide to approve it. Him calling himself a Metrosexual won't help either.

- Geography: Perhaps the biggest one. If the States were to fall the way they did in 2000, the Democrat would lose by 18 electoral votes. So, the Democrats must hold on to Al Gore's states and capture a few Bush states as well. Dean is from New England, a region where the Democrats already dominate and from where the Democrats would not gain much of an advantage having their candidate be from. He might be helpful for New Hampshire, but Vermont is such a different state it would not even be clear there. In fact, Deanis probably one of the candidates least suited to appeal to any states that went for Bush in 2000.